Catholic Search
Custom Search

New Release! Chant Compendium 8 with beautiful Gregorian chant

The lie of evolution is debunked in this masterful book!

Science of Today and the Problems of Genesis

from CHAPTER 8

Testimony of Biologists

The theories of both Lamarck and Darwin were used not only to explain the origin of species in general, but of man in particular; in fact the only use that a number of so-called scientists saw in either of the theories was to afford proof that man was not specially created, but evolved from a brute beast. As there was no real proof, recourse was had to fraud.

Dr. W. R. Thompson referes to this fact in his introduction to The Origin of Species, in which he says that "the success of Darwinism was accompanied by a decline in scientific integrity." He gives as examples the case of the Piltdown skull, in which an ape's jawbone was substituted for the original human one, and the case of the Java Man, in which a battered skullcap of a gibbon was represented as belonging to a creature half-man, half-ape, in order to provide an argument for Darwin's theory that man was descended from an ape.

Dr. Thompson might have added many more examples of fraud. For example, he might have referred to the Australopithecinae fossils, put forward by Drs. Dart and Broom as evidence of evolution, which were proved to be just fossils of ordinary apes by Professor Zuckerman in his chapter in Evolutions as a Process, edited by Dr. Julian Huxley, A. C. Hardy and E. B. Ford. (1954).

It is true to say, therefore, that this formulative period of the theory of evolution was barren of any practical results except to afford a basis for rationalism, a framework for communism, and to provide an incentive for the introduction of fraud and superstition into scientific investigation, when no genuine proof could be found for the theory.

The fourth period might be summed up as a practical acknowledgment of the bankruptcy of Darwin's theory by fitting the real scientific results achieved by Fr. Mendel into it and claiming that they belonged to it, in order to save the theory from devastating, modern criticism. It is like the attempt to save the corpse of Lenin from disintegration by fitting into it parts of other men's bodies.

In his introduction to The Origin of Species already referred to, Dr. W. R. Thompson recognizes the barrenness of Darwin's system, the injury it did to the progress of science and the fact that Mendelism owes nothing to it, and therefore does not belong to it.

In his article in The Catholic Encyclopedia (Vol. X), Sir Bertram Windle produces evidence to show that Fr. Mendel's experiments have in fact exploded the main points of Darwin's theory. In it he writes:

Bateson (in Mendel's Principles of Heredity) claims that "his experiments are worthy to rank among those which laid the foundations of the atomic laws of chemistry"; and Lock, that his discovery "was of an importance little inferior to those of a Newton or a Dalton." Punnett also states that, owing to Mendel's labours, "the position of the biologist of today is much the same as that of a chemist of a century ago, when Dalton enunciated the law of constant proportions." ...T.H. Morgan does not hesitate to say that Mendel's laws give the final coup de grace to the doctrine of Natural Selection. (op. cit. p. 182).

With regard to the claim made by evolutionists that the origin of the various species now existing in the world can be explained by the science of genetics (which as is admitted by all biologists, is but a development of Mendelism), Douglas Dewar writes in Man a Special Creation as follows:

Modern experimental work indicates that variations in organisms appear in consequence of 1) the duplication or multiplication of the chromosomes that occur in the cell nucleus, 2) in the translocation or displacement of parts of chromosomes, 3) the loss of chromosomes or parts of chromosomes, 4) gene mutations, which appear ot be the result of the rearrangement of the molecules that make up the gene, or the action of inhibitors or stimulators of the genes, 5) loss of genes, 6) cross-breeding varieties.
All the above causes are simply a shuffling or rearrangement of parts of the chromosomes or of genes. Such rearrangements may be expected to yield a considerable amount of variation, but clearly must be within the type...
...If a species be defined as a freely interbreeding community, no new animal species has yet been bred by any experimenter. This is very remarkable in view of the fact that breeding experiements lasting over some 30 years have been made with the vinegar fly, Drosophila melanogaster. This produces about 25 generations in a year, hence some 900 successive generations of this species have been bred in the laboratory in the unsuccessful attempt to convert it into another type. This corresponds to about 30,000 years of human existence. There appears to exist no mechanism whereby a new type of organism can arise from an existing one. This explains why all breeds of dogs, pigeons, etc., despite their great diversity are still dogs, pigeons, etc.
That it is impossible to change a dog or a pigeon into anything else but a dog or a pigeon is evident from such facts as the following which are taken from the work of Dr. Hurst, already quoted: "1) The gene is the sole basis of hereditary transmissions. 2) In every case that has been investigated more than one pair of genes are concerned in the development of each character...Genetical experiments show that in the simplest case, at least four pairs of genes are concerned in the organisation and development of the wild agouti coat colour of rabbits, and many other genes are also concerned."
The rearrangement of the molecules that make up one or more of the genes that regulate the colour of the rabbits' fur is likely to effect some change in that colour, but even if there be a simultaneous arrangement of the molecules of all such genes, the effect on the animal's coat is confined to the colour; all such changes are necessarily within narrow limits, and this applies euqally to the genes that regulate other parts of the rabbit, and those of all other animals.
Take a simple one-called organism, such as the amoeba - shuffle ad infinitum the constituent molecules of all the genes that control organisation of the amoeba, and what can the result be other than a modified ameoeba?
In view of the discoveries in genetics made during the past 35 years, those who have a legal training marvel how any geneticist can believe that the great variety of animals that now exist are offspring of some ancestor far more simple than an amoeba...

Taken from Science of Today and the Problems of Genesis by TAN Books & Publishers, Inc.

Other pages discussing Catholic doctrine and history:

Return to Catholic Doctrine Homepage